A reader (thanks MR) had a great topic suggestion for a Friday-free-for-all: How is the smoking ban going so far? Any restaurant/bar owners or workers out there want to provide their two cents? Any customers happy/mad about the ban so far? What say ye?
~Guy~
Comments are closed.
Get the latest and the greatest Frederick news delivered to your reader or your inbox. You can also follow along via Twitter or Facebook.
RSS Feed Email Updates
----------
Airport Xpress has proudly been serving Frederick and it's surrounding communities since 2000. Locally owned and operated, Airport Xpress serves BWI, Dulles, and Reagan National Airport, area train stations and the Port of Baltimore for cruises.----------
Did you know that 52% of customers research online before buying anything? Is your business online? At Aynex Designs, we let you worry about your business, we worry about making your business look good.
----------
The Frederick County Chamber of Commerce connects business and community through leadership, advocacy, and education. Visit frederickchamber.org to view upcoming events, search for local businesses, and learn more about the benefits of membership.----------
The Kitchen Studio Cooking School is the place to Come Play with Your Food! You'll find hands-on and demonstration cooking classes for all ages. There are even awesome cooking birthday parties for kids and adults! Check out the class calendar for the full schedule.----------
----------
One thing I am noticing, that I hadn’t considered before, is that there are more people standing outside of the restaurants smoking. It doesn’t seem like much, but the sidewalks end up clogged and covered with butts. Perhaps smoking receptacles are in order. You can’t win for losing I guess.
I, for one, am thrilled with the new smoking ban. Although I dont have a problem with people smoking, I am allergic to cigarette smoke and previously had to avoid restaurants that also had a bar with smoking in the same room. I am anxious, now that the ban is in effect, to have the opportunity to try some of the restaurants in town that I hear so much about.
Lovin’ it so far, nice to be able to come back after a night of fun and not smell like an ashtray
I too Love that there is No Smoking in Restaurants and Bars in Frederick County!! I go out every Friday Night to Dance/Chill with my friends and it is nice to come home not reeking of Cigarette smoke when I am not a smoker myself.
I don’t see that it has cut down the numbers at the Bar……People just go outside to smoke now.
I heard that if businesses can show in black and white that not having a smoking section is hurting their business, they may consider letting them have a smoking section.
Is the Hookah bar still allowed to run?
Yes, I read that they are allowed to keep the hookahs, but no cigarette smoking is allowed at the bar.
The problem now is that you have to pass through everyone who is clustered near the door smoking. Some places have banned smoking within a certain number of feet from the door. And people are going to litter regardless.
I guess nothing is going to be perfect.
There should be a fine for people that drop cigarette butts on the ground. I hate seeing all the butts that are always at intersections. I dont understand why people dont put them in their ashtray.
Banning smoking was a decision that simply is not the government’s to make, considering that smoking tobacco remains perfectly legal. Whether a private business establishment allows smoking is the decision of that business and no one else, and it should be based on whether the clientele is better served by allowing smoking or not.
As a result, I never want to hear anyone in Annapolis ask for a tobacco tax increase again.
I’m not a smoker, and I’m not a tobacco lobbyist; I’m just an anti-anti-smoker. More of my thoughts here.
I don’t think that smoking itself is banned, only smoking in a restaurant/bar where non smokers also congregate. If someone chooses to smoke and put themself at risk for the health complications that go with smoking, then it is their choice, but it is not fair to ask those who choose not to smoke, to also be subjected to the risks that are associated with second hand smoke.
Smoking Ban. What smoking ban? I still smoke.
That said, I was told by the Manager at one of our local haunts that business dropped 25% the first week of the ban. We were there tonight and there were plenty of extra stools at the bar at 7 PM on a Friday.
So I would argue that the ban is not bringing more people out to patronize their favorite establishment. Not yet, at least.
Okay, as of tonight, Mirage, the hookah bar, is no longer serving hookah or allowing any smoking. As much as I absolutely love that place, this is really upsetting. We have a quick write-up but it doesn’t go into detail. We’ll work on getting more information soon.
Banning smoking in Maryland restaurants isn’t a reflection of a “nanny state” so much as it represents the will of the majority speaking through their legislators. Call it the tyranny of the majority if you wish, but the ban is law and carries with it the full weight of the government. It will never be rescinded, so whining about it is a waste of time.
In the last decade, more than 3 million Americans have died from tobacco-related disease. That’s 60 times the number dead than all the American soldiers killed during the Vietnam War–60 times. How many more millions of Americans must die before our nation gets serious about this public healthy menace?
Sure, you can argue that restaurants should instead be given the right to voluntarily impose their own restrictions (or lack thereof) and the public can choose to patronize or avoid these establishments, but that approach clearly wasn’t working and our healthcare costs nationally were going through the roof.
All of us treasure our freedoms, but let’s not fetishize the right to smoke a cancer-causing drug whenever and wherever one wants. What happened in Maryland is the government took a sensible, reasonable step to reduce the incidence of several ghastly diseases that even the tobacco lobby admits are linked to tobacco. I, as with so many others, have watched loved ones slowly die from lung cancer and emphysema–among them several non-smokers. Had more enlightened laws been enacted back then at their workplaces and restaurants, these good people might have been spared dreadful ordeals. And people like you could have gone outside and still enjoyed your smokes.
If you want to worry about your Constitutional rights, worry instead about a Congress and Senate that allow telecommunications companies to share your telephone and Internet records with the government–without your permission, without court order, and without your being able to sue. Worry instead about a federal government that tortures prisoners and denies them their day in court, that withholds due process, that wiretaps telephone conversations on the flimsiest of “evidence,” that keeps files on innocent Americans, and that falsifies evidence and outright lies, so that it can trigger a stampede of public opinion that plunges this great nation into a senseless, ruinous war. Worry about those issues, not about your “right” to spread your carcinogenic smoke inside restaurants and bars.
On a related note, I do see some problems ahead. The Maryland ordnance allows restaurants/bars to seek a two- or three-year exemption to this ban if they can document that business is off by 25 percent during the first two or three months. Some businessowners will take advantage of this loophole, and thereby put their competition at a competitive disadvantage, which will raise howls.
That really sucks about Mirage. Gah.
I agree. They have a unique situation and I hope FredRocks gets to the bottom of it. From everything I’ve read, they were still going to be able to sell their own tobacco for the hookahs. I don’t want to see another business downtown go under.
Rather than making this into a pointless tennis-match thread, Matthew, I’ll agree to disagree with you on just about every point, and leave it at that.
seems like this is more about smoking vs no smoking, that is a battle that will rage forever
the question asked– is it hurting business?
i have been to 2 establishments that have heavy bar business on the weekends and both bars were EMPTY, it was shocking, and has to be affecting their businesses, i feel for them
Have been out and about the past few weekends and at places I normally did not visit due to smoke. This without a doubt is wonderful!
Places were busy and folks did not seem to mind going outside for a puff….
“the needs of the many, out weigh the needs of the few or the one” Thanks Mr. Spock!
cmk305 and others, I’d be interested to learn precisely which restaurants and bars are suddenly hurting–and being helped– because of the smoking ban.
Can you provide names?
Isn’t February normally dead downtown?
Unless you have barhopped in the dead middle of February previous years, it’s kinda hard to say it’s dropped off from the norm. I’m not doubting anyone’s opinion but it’s gonna be really hard to tell until the weather gets warmer and brings more than just the downtowners out.
Not to mention the recession…I know the first thing I do when I’m strapped is stop paying a 5 dollar cover charge to pay 5 dollars a drink.
I agree with February thing…also, bars hurting??? It’s not like you can just go to the next bar and smoke there. C’mon, this is state wide, are ya gonna drive to a different state just to light up and have a beer indoors? All are effected equally.
Now when walking my dog past Firestones I have to dodge all the smoke from those standing outside getting their fix..
Dude,
Go talk with one of the managers at Houlihans in FSK Mall.
Most all restaurants are hurting these days. Restaurants are collectively, among the most accurate bellwethers of economic turn downs, i.e., recessions. Ask most any restaurant owner–particularly those of mediocre and marginal eateries, of which Houlihans belongs–and they will tell you business has been off for months.
Also, January and February, as said earlier, aren’t great for restaurants. It’s been that way since day one.
I might add: Smokers do not have to patronize these Maryland businesses. They have every right to smoke outside, at home, in their cars, almost anywhere. Indeed, the entire planet is their oyster, sans the restaurants and bars of Maryland.
Enjoy.
I might add: Smokers do not have to patronize these Maryland businesses. They have every right to smoke outside, at home, in their cars, almost anywhere.
For now, Dude . . . for now.
Case in point:
Ocean City is prepared to ban smoking on the beach and boardwalk.
#sigh#
I haven’t noticed any lack of customers and the smoke free atmosphere is fine by me.
Cygnus -
Not exactly an accurate statement about Ocean City. Discussions might happen is not the same as preparing to ban:
Ocean City Mayor Richard W. Meehan said there have been no official discussions about replicating the Bethany ban at Maryland’s best-known beach, but he said the debate might take place, if people become more accustomed to the statewide regulations.
I remember the howls and screams of the smokers in my workplace back in 1995 when they first learned MD would enact a ban on smoking in the office environment. Some swore they simply couldn’t withstand the daily pressures and hassles without a cigarette (or, double-YECH, cigar) in hand. Some said they’d have to quit and find a job in VA. Well, guess what, everybody adjusted (and many eventually freed themselves of the habit). The smoke-free office has been “business as usual” for a long time now. And a similar adjustment will be made now that restaurants and bars are at last smoke-free.
Sorry, but the end (supposedly healthier workplaces/eating establishments) does not justify the means (government intrusion on private property matters). Walter Williams elaborates further.
Joe, you missed the part where Bethany Beach has already drafted such legislation as Ocean City is considering.
Cygnus -
I didn’t miss anything. You stated “Ocean City is prepared to ban smoking on the beach and boardwalk.”. That’s simply not true.
Cygnus, if the quest for more healthful/healthier conditions does not justify government intrusion on private property matters, how say you to the following?
* Construction, Housing & Fire Code Inspections. Should government at the local, county, state or federal levels have the right to impose building standards on privately owned homes/condos/apartment buildings?
* Regulation of Daycare Centers. Should government have the right to impose standards on privately owned centers that cater to the young? Should a daycare worker be allowed to smoke a cigar, or marijuana, or crack cocaine, as she takes care of a child?
* Meat/poultry Inspections. What is your stance regarding this week’s recall of 135 million pounds of potentially tainted meat? This recall follows similar recalls of meat/poultry infected with e-coli, samonella, and fecal coliform. Should the government have the right to impose standards on privately held companies?
* Airline and Automotive Safety. Should the government have the right to impose reasonable safety standards on privately held companies, or should we embrace a system of caveat emptor?
* Mining Safety. Ditto. Should privately held coal mines be held to a certain reasonable safety standard, or should miners enter at their own risk?
* Restaurant Inspections. Should government sanitation inspectors have the right to ensure the cleanliness of food preparation areas, or again is your position one of “buyer beware”? In the absence of inspection, how might consumers learn about the sanitary conditions of a particular restaurant–by conducting their own inspections?
* Consumer Product Recalls. Should the government (that is: the people) have the right to impose its will on privately held companies and issue product recalls–of lead-tainted toys or easily swallowed items that might cause asphyxiation, or would you prefer a system of dog eat dog? Should the government force privately held companies to recall dangerous automobiles, or let things go unnoticed?
I could provide dozens more examples, but await your response. I might note that few people would want to live in your world.
Joe: Quod scripsi, scripsi.
Matthew: You just helped my argument. The real problem with banning smoking is that it has nothing to do with health issues, as everything you just cited does (save for day care licensing, and how do you account for unlicensed day care, hmmm?). It has to do with what non-smokers consider a nuisance.
If the people (who are NOT the government, except in your world) don’t like how a business operates, they can ask the business to change, or (gasp!) find or start a business that meets their needs better. I reckon on this point we won’t agree, because for me, the less government intervention/regulation, the better. This is capitalism, not socialism.
And in answer to all your questions: No.
Matthew, I don’t want to live in your world, either. But, for now, I do. It’s called . . . Maryland.
Dozens of peer-reviewed studies published in respected journals have established a clear and compelling causative link between passive tobacco smoke and numerous disorders. To deny that fundamental fact is to deny reality itself.
Consider this from the National Institutes of Health: “This toll makes passive smoking the third leading preventable cause of death in the United States today, behind active smoking and alcohol.”
And this: “Meconium analysis indicates that nicotine metabolite concentrations in infants of passive smokers are not significantly different from those in infants of active light smokers. Fetal exposure to tobacco smoke may therefore be substantial even as a result of maternal passive smoking.”
And this: “Passive smoking unfavorably affects pregnancy, child birth and child health. Passive smoking associates with still-birth, premature birth as well as acute respiratory infection, asthma, disorder in red blood cell metabolism in children.”
And this: “Researchers from London’s St George’s Medical School and the Royal Free hospital found passive smoking increased the risk of coronary heart disease by 50-60%.”
And this: “Children who are exposed to environmental tobacco smoke (passive smoking) are at a higher risk of developing lung cancer as adults, says a paper in this week’s BMJ.”
And on, and on, and on.
All irrelevant to the topic at hand, and I’m not chewing my cabbage twice. Have a nice day, Matthew.
Matthew,
You are disillusioned.
Speaking with factual data from the Centers of Disease Control’s most recent report on Mortality (National Vital Statistics Report, CDC, August 2007 URL: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr55/nvsr55_19.pdf)
Here’s the skinny:
“Results—In 2004,a total of 2,397,615 deaths were reported in the United States. The age-adjusted death rate was800.8 deaths per 100,000 standard population, representing a decrease of 3.8 percent from the2003 rate and a record low historical figure. Life expectancy at birth rose by 0.4 year to a record high of 77.8y ears.Age-specific death rates decreased for all age groups.(The decrease for children aged 5–14 years was not statistically significant.) The15 leading causes of death in 2004 remained the same as in 2003. Heart disease and cancer continued to be the leading and second leading causes of death, together accounting for over one-half of all deaths. In 2004, Alzheimer’s disease surpassed and swapped positions with Influenza, relative to their previous placements in 2003.The infant mortality rate in 2004 was 6.79 per 1,000 births.
Conclusions—Generally, mortality patterns in 2004 were consistent with long-term trends. Life expectancy in 2004 increased again to a new record level. The age-adjusted death rate declined to a record low historical figure. Although not statistically significant, the decrease in the infant mortality rate is typical of recent trends; except for 2002, the infant mortality rate has either decreased or remained level each successive year from1958 to 2004.”
Although you make reference to some interesting preliminary studies, you have failed to substantiate your rants with either data or peer reviewed, scientific data. Life in the US is a good thing and it’s getting better; furthermore, smoking is only a minor contributor to all of the world’s problems.
How about we stick to that “agree to disagree” thing guys. Thanks.
yes I agree to disagree. Lets argue about important things like which restaurant has the best cheeseburgers.
I disagree!
(Oops, thought I was on Hollywood Squares for a second.
)
I am sooo glad to be rid of tobacco in restaurants, and wish the noxious weed good riddance as it retreats further from our lives after centuries as a negative constant in American life. It has killed enough of our families and enough of our friends.
First I think Mathew should unwrapped the tin foil around his head since. The big question to ask is how is this affecting the people who work in the restaurants/bars. I can’t agree more that smoking is bad for you but so is working in mines yet we don’t see to much being done to make them safer for the workers. As a downtown resident the only problem I see is the noise coming from the drunks outside bars smoking, we all know that people who have been drinking tend to get louder as they drink more. So now we have people standing outside leaving there cig butt’s on the ground and making more noise than ever before, does this make frederick better or worse??
John D. You are awesome. And I couldn’t agree with you even more.
ORRRRRRR the smokers could control themselves and NOT litter our beautiful earth!! MMMMM, not a bad idea!!
BUTTS ARE LITTER!!
Why is that not a universally agreed upon theory? I consider this like me unwrapping a piece of gum and just tossing the wrapper in the street….Unacceptable.
@Mindy, I agree the world is not your ashtray. I hate driving behind people as they throw their butts out the window. I know your car has an ash tray, use it. Same goes for smoking outside. Maybe the city or the businesses should set up some ash trays outside.
I’m tickled pink that there are excellent smoke-free restaurants to visit here. When my wife and I were researching Frederick before moving across the pond a few weeks ago, we were both glad to see the smoking ban in place.
We visited Ireland shortly after that country banned smoking in restaurants and bars, and despite the wailing and gnashing about losing businesses, the service industry actually sort of exploded; not to mention that over the next year or two the general health of employees in those places was better 9evinced by fewer sick days taken and lower health care costs).
The German state of Bavaria banned smoking in January, and a similar wave of anguish over possibly failing profits also failed to precipitate and the restaurants,, gasthauses and bars are just as full as ever.
I don’t care if other people smoke, as long as they don’t do it where/while I’m eating …
John D, if you’re not concerned about smokers’ impact on the health of diners and restaurant employees–and you’ve already acknowledged the attendant risks–I guess a lot of us non-smokers aren’t going to be terribly concerned about obnoxious smokers downtown waking you up in the middle of the night. While I certainly recognize that insomnia carries some health risks, “so is working in mines yet we don’t see to much being done to make them safer for the worker.”
The smokers lost, but also now have an additional incentive to kick their dangerous habit. That’s a win-win for everybody.
OK, Matthew since you have brought it up twice I have to address your Mine issue….
Have you been to this site? I went there the first time you brought it up…..
http://www.msha.gov/
Seems as if they are taking many steps towards enhancing mine safety….and how does mine safety have anything to do with smoking? Mining is inherently dangerous…so is smoking…maybe that’s it!
I always love the twists and turns these posts take!!
If scientists could harness the untapped energy from all the lip-flapping smokers grousing about their infringed rights and the impending police state in America, this nation wouldn’t need coal mines, OPEC or Al Gore.
Of course, the unemployed miners would then blame smokers for their financial predicament.
Sorry, smokers, but resistance is futile.
Whenever I listen to John Lennon’s great song “Imagine,” I always tweak the lyrics a bit in my mind in reflection of my own fervent (admittedly improbable) hope: Imagine all the people….living life smoke-free.
Comrades, well done in implementing this operation for the good of society!
Well, at first I was upset about the smoking ban because (you guessed it) I was a smoker in February 2008.
I agreed that it should be up to the owner of the establishment to make that decision. We should let the market system dictate changes in our laws; aren’t we as American’s opposed to dictatorship?
However, after all the pressure that comes from every angle in a smokers life (not to mention my own suffering), I have kicked the habit. I thank God that I don’t have to be subject to second hand smoke because that only makes it tougher to quit….monkey see, monkey do!
There IS a role for government in providing for the common good. So many examples…just to throw out a couple. If it had been up to the owner of the establishment and the market system alone to dictate changes in the law, practices such as children working in factories, 12+ hour workdays, and any number of unfair/dangerous labor practices would have been around a lot longer than they were. Thank goodness for government mandated vaccinations/innoculations, food inspections, etc. and so many other measures that we tend to overlook and take for granted but have made our collective lives better.
Matthew, Matthew, who or what did you wrong. It’s not so much as keeping me up a night (which it doesn’t so don’t worry, thanks though). The point which you missed completely (maybe due to that tin foil again)so I’ll spell it out…. What type of image is Frederick trying to establish, one of trash littered sidewalks where couples take risks walking main street only to be harassed by drunks standing outside there perspective bar. As a person who has had the fortune to see more of this world than most I can say first impressions due make a difference. We all know that smoking is bad for you, so what isn’t… What’s worse is someone else deciding what is good for you and making you do it. In that world Matthew could find himself thrown in a cell with no chance to get out. It is a slippery slope to start mandating what people do and say, what’s next matthew?
Hey, John, feel free to express whatever position you wish, but there’s really no need for your personalized “tin hat” snipes. This forum isn’t like that at the Frederick News-Post, where insults and sharp elbows are par for course.
Enjoy your day, my good man.
“What’s worse is someone else deciding what is good for you and making you do it. ”
This is not an issue that I generally get up in arms about. But John D, that line doesn’t work in favor of smokers.
Smokers decide every day that I have to join them in their habit. Every time I get caught behind one on the sidewalk and end up enveloped in a cloud of their smoke, that person has decided that I should be a smoker. Every time I enter a bar that allows smoking, a whole bunch of people have decided to make me smoke. What smokers so often and so conveniently forget is that their habit is not one that they can keep entirely to themselves, unless they confine it to their own home or car.
But then again, maybe they *do* realize it, in which case that means that they’re deciding what’s good for the rest of us and they’re making us do it, too. Hmmmm….
I will let the pro-tobacco contingent argue with a May 6, 2008 study published in prestigious Journal of the American College of Cardiology, which said:
“Researchers at the University of California, San Francisco found that healthy nonsmokers exposed to 30 minutes of second-hand smoke showed signs of blood vessel injury and impaired repair responses that persisted up to 24 hours after exposure.
Also this:
“Second-hand smoke poses a serious and pervasive health risk to children and adults according to the comprehensive 2006 report from the U.S. Surgeon General, The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke. The report highlighted how vulnerable children in particular are to second-hand smoke. Children exposed to secondhand smoke are at an increased risk for sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), acute respiratory infections, ear problems, worsening of allergies and more severe asthma.
“The report also links second-hand smoke to coronary heart disease and lung cancer in adults and notes that even a brief exposure to second-hand smoke has immediate adverse effects on a person’s cardiovascular system.”
The Journal continued,
“The researchers learned that in healthy nonsmokers, even
brief exposure to secondhand smoke resulted in blood vessel dysfunction and interfered with the activity of endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs), which are believed to play a key role in repairing blood vessels.”
“Taken together, these findings provide further evidence that even a very short period of passive smoke exposure has strong, persistent vascular consequences,” the scientists write in the journal article.”
The scientists say, “our results help explain why there is a big immediate drop in heart attacks when smoke-free laws are passed.”
This new study provides further experimental support for this warning by the CDC: “‘Could eating in a smoky restaurant precipitate an acute myocardial infarction in a non-smoker? . . ., a growing body of scientific data suggests that this is possible . . . laboratory data suggest that even 30 minutes of exposure to a typical dose of secondhand smoke induces changes in arterial endothelial function in exposed non-smokers of a magnitude similar to those measured in active smokers.”
A similar warning appeared in an article in a leading medical journal entitled ‘Cardiovascular Effects of Secondhand Smoke – Nearly as Large as Smoking’ which found that ‘the effects of even brief (minutes to hours) passive smoking are often nearly as large (averaging 80% to 90%) as chronic active smoking,’)
Perhaps most tellingly of all, the US Surgeon General has stated in no uncertain terms:
* There is no safe amount of secondhand tobacco smoke.
* People who have heart disease should be very careful not to go where they will be around secondhand smoke.
* The bottom line is that breathing secondhand smoke makes it more likely that you will get heart disease, have a heart attack, and die early.
* Even a short time in a smoky room causes your blood platelets to stick together. Secondhand smoke also damages the lining of your blood vessels. In your heart, these bad changes can cause a deadly heart attack.
Sometimes sharp elbows and kicks to the shins are the only way to get people’s attention. Words can be used to describe a beautiful sunrise or true work of art. In this case words are used to get our opinion front and center for all to read and see. Speaking of words, a few have been printed along side every pack of smokes, anyone not taking the time to realize that smoking posses a health risk to you and those around you is well not the brightest bulb but that doesn’t mean we should not listen to there opinion. Smokers feel singled out, non-smokers feel liberated, freedom of choice is gone forever. Please we all know that smoking is bad for you, here are a couple of things that are bad for you and maybe should be banned also from restaurants:
1. Salt- Heart disease, high blood pressure, etc..
2. Oil/Butter/Margerine – yep… high blood pressure, heart disease, etc..
3. Fat
4. too much red meat (maybe we should have a specific daily diet for people to have when they go out to eat, if you have had steak once this week the restaurant shouldn’t serve you another)
5. Cream/Half-Half (yep, not good for you)
6. Alcohol (really, should we mandate that people only have one drink a week since we all know that alcohol is addictive, health risks, liver failure, kidney damage, etc..)
So where does it stop?? I promise to keep the elbows tucked in, just don’t pretend to know all the answers, were only human.
Yes, John D – those are all bad for “you” – but when you eat or drink those items, it doesn’t cause cancer in the folks sitting at the next table.
Reason slices and dices Carmona’s arguments quite nicely:
As the report itself makes clear, there is no evidence that brief, transient exposure to secondhand smoke has any effect on your chance of developing heart disease or lung cancer. The studies that link secondhand smoke to these illnesses involve intense, long-term exposure, typically among people who have lived with smokers for decades.
…
Because the associations found in the secondhand smoke studies are so weak, it’s impossible to rule out alternative explanations, such as unreported smoking or other lifestyle variables that independently raise disease risks. Although the surgeon general’s report concludes such factors are unlikely to entirely account for the observed associations, the truth is we don’t know for sure and probably never well, given the limitations of epidemiology and the difficulty of measuring low-level risks.
…
Even supporters of smoking bans, such as longtime anti-smoking activist Michael Siegel, faulted Carmona for gilding the lily (blackening the lung?) by saying things such as, “There is NO risk-free level of secondhand smoke exposure.” This position contradicts the basic toxicological principle that the dose makes the poison. Since it’s hard to measure even the health consequences of heavy, long-term exposure to secondhand smoke, how could one possibly demonstrate an effect from, say, a few molecules? “No risk-free level” is an article of faith, not a scientific statement.[/i]
Ball’s in your court, Matthew.
P.S. Last month, I went to Wags. The place was nearly empty, which says to me the smoking ban has hurt the restaurant. In fact, I, a non-smoker, genuinely missed having the smoke in the air at Wags. It just didn’t seem right.
BTW, Guy, can we please get a “preview” button here? I can’t fix my botched HTML in the above post. Thanks in advance.
Reason Magazine–a forum for libertarian extremists, and yes I mean extremists–also argues that smoking bans increase drunk driving, that food stamps and unemployment should be banished, that automobile seat belts and air bags should not be required, and that the federal and state governments should be all but dissolved. Welcome to bizarro world.
Cygnus, please consult the latest findings published in the prestigious Journal of the American College of Cardiology.
But heres’ the larger point: There is no “ball” and there is no “court.” On Feb. 1, 2008, Maryland’s non-smoking majority won, its smokers won by “losing,” and our nation’s Bill of Rights still somehow manages to survive. When you move to Nevada, you will find plenty of smoke-filled restaurants to feel “right.”
Why don’t you smoke, Cygnus? Seems you’d be a natural.
My reference to Reason Magazine as an extremist publication is simple. First, it is a fact. Second, I place far greater credence in the thousands of distinguished epidemiologists, medical specialists, PhD researchers, and biostatisticians of the western world’s most prestigious medical institutes and universities than I do in the rantings of an extremist magazine that somehow believes itself the defender of the Bill of Rights against an ignorant, weak, selfish, and dangerous American public.
@Cygnus, sorry no preview button, but if you want to provide me with the updated text with links I will make the edit for you.
Before there is bloodshed I think I will cut this post off. Thanks for participating in the second great smoking debate (here was the first way back in 2005).